CRICKET MEMORIES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17981, 5 January 1922, Page 7

CRICKET MEMORIES.

AUCKLAND CLUB ELEVENS.

IN THE EARLY EIGHTIES. BT S.C. , I hopo tho following notes may appeal not only to those of ray contemporaries in Auckland during the years 1882 to 1835 who are still alive, but to the present wielders of the willow in that lovely spot which was my home during the period mentioned. Looking back at the records of cricket there and comparing them with those .i the present day in general, one is struck by the low general average of our scoring. No fault could bo found, as a rule, with the wickets on the Domain, although tbe light was somewhat trying at times, and I am of the opinion that, taking it all round, the bowling was on a higher plane than the batt.ng there in thoso days.

The Auckland Cricket Club was generally admitted to be the leading club, followed by tho Auckland United, Gordon, West End, and Our Boys, in the order named. Being a member of tho Auckland Cricket Club, and playing regularly lor it. I was naturally more in touch with my fellow members, and oua' eleven was generally mado up from the following :— W. W. Robinsja (captain), W. E. Barton, A. O'Brien, C. S. Stafford, S. Cozon, A. E. Dewes, Fi. Blair, J. C. Webster, A. M. Beale, E. C. Ueale, C. Gardener, J. Matheson. They made a formidable combination of sev<iu or eight good batsmen, and the rest were bowlcts, The weaK spot in ihe team was in the wicketkeeping, and during the four seasons I played for the Auckland Cricket Club we could never unearth a good stumper. This must also be said of the other clubs in Auckland, whereas Christchurch had an excellent one in Fowke. and Dunedin a fair one iu Captain Spring.

Auckland Cricket Club. Of our batsmen, Barton ' was " facile princeps." He camo from Hampshire, and I believe had been coached by Jupp, the Surrey crack. He was a master of every stroke, and lost no time in getting to work. If he had a fault it was in trying to hit hard on the log side when a forward push would have been more effective. I consider he was quite up to "W, match" form, as be was also a very good bowler and keen field. Eobinson (Billy) was another good " all round " man, and as a captain was hard to beat. A sound bat, albeit a somewhat risky one at times, a first-rate slow left-hand bowler, and with a thorough knowledge of the game, he was looked upon as the authority on cricket in Auckland. No team could have worked under a more congenial skipper. A. O'Brien was perhaps the prettiest bat in the team with his taking wrist style and was without doubt, the best field. Stafford, Blair and Dewes were all hitters, and big ones too. The firstnamed is still hale and hearty, and I run across him occasionally when we talk of old times in New Zealand. For bowlers, we had Arthur Beale, fast with almost invariably a good length. He was our chief trundler. In 1883-4, for oxample, his work showed the following analysis:—Overs 265, maidens 85, runs 455. wickets 77, average 5.70. He was well supported bv his brother Ernest, Jadk Webster and J. Matheson. The lastnamed mode the ball break back to an abnormal extent i nd had he practised more ho woidd, no dcubt, have been the best bowler in New Zealand in those days.

Auckland United and West End. As rcaaids the ether clubs, the Auckland United had perhaps the soundest bat of all, in the veteran Yafes, who was always partnered by the stone-waller, Tcstro. I -veil remember one match against the Alpha- Club, in which they ran up 170 for'the mat wicket, and tho score at the end of the day was 250 without further loss, Yates being 138 not out and Lankham 44 not out. By the way, the day this took place was a. lucky one for me, as we were playing the West End Cricket Club. 1 joined Barton when four wickets were down for 38 and was not out with 66 to my credit, the total being 205, so this caused my inclusion in the provincial team which was about to visit the South, but of which more ancn. Reverting to Lankham, he was undoubtedly (he best bowler in Auckland, and I might even say in New Zealand, from 1883 to 1885 a Tall, with a fast delivery, he mado the ball come quickly off the pitch and kept a wonderful length. He was ulso a capital bat. Perhaps the most prolific scorer after Barton in Auckland cricket at that time was Jack Ameil, the West End crack. Ho was a most delightful bat to watch and the extraordinary thing was he never practised owing to his work detaining him (ill too lite in the day. Nevertheless, in matches, lie almost invariably scored well and wo were always highly pleased when we captured his wicket. Ltynch, of the same club, was in his day a most dangerous bowler, knd as a batsman was always relied upon by his club for runs. C. F. Reid was also one of the West End's chief supports._ being a good bowler and fair bat, and in King they had a better stumper than the other clubs possessed. Gordon and Our Boys.

The Gordon Club was composed of younger men, and the way they worked themselves up to the front was most creditable. They had some first-class bats in Ryburn, Claytcn, Moresby, Holdship, L. Meldrum, and others, while in W. Meldrum and Gould they possessed two bowlers far above the average. We knew this to our cost in the 1885-86 season, being beaten by an innings and 95 runs, W. Meldrum taking six wickets for 13 runs in our second innings. The wicset, however, was impossible owing to rain. " Our Boys" Club was perhaps hardly up to the form of the others, but in Mills they had a bowler almost the equal of Laiikham. He was also a useful bat, as were N. George and Nesbit. Mills' bowling in the Auckland versus Canterbury match, alluded to below, must also bo a record, looking at the result of the innings. This match was one of the inter-provin-cial contests in 1885. Auckland played Otago and Canterbury at Christchurch, and Wellington on their way back. We were badly beaten by Canterbury, but beat Otago and drew (in our favour) with Wellington. Our team could not be considered representative as we were without Yates,, Arneil, Linkham, and O'Brien, none of whom could get away. The match against Otago was an exciting one. They led on the first innings by 58. Goiug in for the second time they could do nothing against the bowling of Lynch and W. Meldrum, and were all out for 35. Lynch's analysis read: 16 overs, 11 maidens, 17 runs, 6 wickets; and Meldrum's, 16 overs, 11 maidens, 15 runs, 4 wickets. This left us 94 to win. We lost four wickets for 25, Barton 0, Testro 0, Stafford 3, and myself 21, but Lynch and Robinson made a good stand, and we ultimately won the match by five wickets, Robinson being not out, 42. Perhaps the most extraordinary bowling I have ever come across, considering the total of the innings, and which I have just I alluded to, was that of Ned Mills, in Canterbury's first innings. They ran up a score of 346 against us, Wilding, the father of Antbony, the tennis champion, who, alas, lost his life for the Empire, making 103 in great style. Of the said total of 346, only 39 runs were hit off Mills, who captured seven wickets, clean bowling five. What a pity we hadn't another like him at the other end!